University research in the Age of Protest

  • #71
Mayhem said:
Then break-in would be obvious and an investigation would begin immediately.
These students aren't sneaking around. They want attention. Their proposition is, at its core, "Accept out demands, or we will break your stuff."
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #72
Frabjous said:
I would replace the current leadership with one that will create a civil society on campus.
And I would replace the more extreme protestors with ones who will hold hands and sing Kumbaya. But I don't think either is going to happen.

The modern academic view is very simple: you have oppressors and you have the oppressed. Given that worldview, no administrator wants to put himself in the category of "oppressor".

But you might be able to improve safety by moving dangerous things off campus. If you want to say the protestors are acting like children, shouldn't we child-proof the campus?
 
  • #73
Vanadium 50 said:
These students aren't sneaking around. They want attention. Their proposition is, at its core, "Accept out demands, or we will break your stuff."
Then the onus is on them not to hurt themselves in the process. If the law puts the onus on the university to make sure vandals are protected when damaging property that is ass about in my view.
Vanadium 50 said:
Shouldn't we child-proof the campus?
That's an option.
The government could instruct the victim of crimes (Universities ) to cater for protestors (criminals) lack of health and safety awareness.
Via extra security where required? following safety audits, risk assessments by a third party or similar?
Security guards have salaries and audits have auditors and man day rates which cost $. That cost could be passed onto the victims of the crime (students) in terms of fees, eventually paid for by the tax payer (me and you)

I am happy to pay for textbooks and lab equipment every year, not as happy cater for a 63 old protestor breaking into an NMR lab with a pacemaker.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes BillTre
  • #74
Frabjous said:
I would replace the current leadership with one that will create a civil society on campus.
Both have had issues with that kind of thing.


Badly behaved protestors have always been around regardless of the back drop here and over there (USA)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes BillTre
  • #75
Andy Resnick said:
Or is it ok to sentence a faculty member to deal with monstrous hills every day while they commute between class and lab?
It's only a couple of miles from the Stanford campus to SLAC, and mostly flat, IIRC.

1717018078093.png
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Klystron
  • #76
Vanadium 50 said:
A. What is the right kind of hooligan?
B. I don't subscribe to the philosophy that if you can't fix everything you can't fix anything.
A) is difficult to answer here, regarding posting guidelines. Let's go with "people (faculty/staff/students) who have key-card access to dangerous materials and become radicalized".

Edit: additionally, "people who can order hazardous materials through the university purchasing system".
 
Last edited:
  • #77
Vanadium 50 said:
And I would replace the more extreme protestors with ones who will hold hands and sing Kumbaya. But I don't think either is going to happen.
So your solution is billions in new spending. Thanks for joining me in fantasy land.
 
  • #78
pinball1970 said:
The government could instruct the victim of crimes (Universities ) to cater for protestors (criminals) lack of health and safety awareness.
They kind of already do. See Bodine v. Enterprise High School. (some details at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enterprise_High_School_(Redding,_California). Eighteen-year old goes on a roof to steal a floodlight, steps through a skylight, and is injured. The school is found liable. California changed its laws after this, but there are 49 other states.

Legal liability aside, though, having the university telling the parents of a dead kid "its the kid's own damn fault" would be a PR disaster.
 
  • Wow
Likes pinball1970
  • #79
Frabjous said:
So your solution is billions in new spending. Thanks for joining me in fantasy land.
Why not? Harvard has $50B in the bank.
 
  • Wow
Likes pinball1970
  • #80
Vanadium 50 said:
Why not? Harvard has $50B in the bank.
They could lose a $100 million in donations and pay a $1 million/per body and still come out way ahead.
 
  • #81
Vanadium 50 said:
Try that at Colorado School of Mines
Are their diplomas carved in stone tablets?

Astronuc said:
In the case of a small reactor (TRIGA), there security was more restrictive
When I left UVa the nuclear engineering department was in the midst of complying with new stricter regulations for the reactor building. I'm not sure what changes were made. When I was there, we had film badges but I don't remember carding into the building.

Mayhem said:
work hours! I could sneak out poisons with very little risk of being caught before it was too late.
Given your username, I think maybe we need to worry, lol

berkeman said:
BTW, There should be NFPA placards on any labs that have hazardous materials in them. Quizzing the protesters to make sure they know what the placards mean is another issue...

View attachment 346152
https://hmexassistant.com/products/nfpa-704-cas-number/

Here's a view of a non-university lab door. I'd like to think this signage would keep the hooligans out, but who knows?

door_signs_web.jpg
 
  • Like
Likes Klystron and Astronuc
  • #82
gmax137 said:
I'd like to think this signage would keep the hooligans out, but who knows?
Well, unless you're on the team responding to the alarm... :wink:

1717255742965.png
 
  • #83
  • #84
BillTre said:
I think these are only on external doors, for the responders coming from outside.
Well, sort of. I'm no expert on the matter, but there are plenty of times I've had to watch for such signs and decide whether to enter a building or room. Here is what NFPA says on their summary web page:
Where do signs need to be located?

The placard is meant to provide quick hazard information for emergency responders. It should be visible in case of an emergency where the responders are likely to enter. If there are numerous areas where the responders could enter the facility, there should be numerous placards. The placement and quantity should be decided using a facility’s best judgment coupled with the advice from your AHJ. At a minimum the placard should be posted on the two exterior walls of a facility or building, each access to a room or area, or each principal means of access to an exterior storage area.
https://www.nfpa.org/news-blogs-and-articles/blogs/2021/11/05/hazardous-materials-identification

So for example, a large building may have a main entrance that is all fancy and beautiful for the general public (and first responders may use it sometimes too), but they are not going to put an NFPA placard at that main entrance for aesthetic reasons (especially a placard with high numbers on it). As you make your way into the back of the building into the industrial plant rooms, that's where you will tend to see such placards, where only employees and first responders (and inspectors) will see them.

1717257245940.jpeg

https://resourcecompliance.com/2022/05/31/iiar-2-2021-nfpa-704/
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes Klystron, gmax137 and BillTre
  • #85
gmax137 said:
Are their diplomas carved in stone tablets?
Close. Engraved on silver.
 
  • Informative
Likes gmax137
  • #86
Vanadium 50 said:
Close. Engraved on silver.
Wow I did not know that!
 
  • #87
For those who argued "put a good lock on the door", Stanford Protestors broke into the building with the offices of the president and provost this morning. In this variation on Rock-Paper-Scissors, crowbar beats doorframe.
 
  • #88
Was this particularly secure building?
What was the police response time?
 
  • #91
Are there labs in that building?
 
  • #92
BillTre said:
Was this particularly secure building?
Evidently not. :smile:
BillTre said:
The article says the cops used the crowbar.
The say they used a crowbar.

The cops came in a back entrance. Photos of the front also show damage to a door. But I think this still reinforces my point - these doors are not intended to keep people out who are willing to damage them. This isn't Fort Knox.
 
  • #93
Vanadium 50 said:
Photos of the front also show damage to a door.
Photos please...
 
  • #94
In the 60’s, the protests were much larger and there were “violent” deaths. How many deaths were caused by accidental exposure to campus research equipment?
 
  • #95
Frabjous said:
In the 60’s, the protests were much larger and there were “violent” deaths. How many deaths were caused by accidental exposure to campus research equipment?
Weren't most of them from the police or national guard?
 
Last edited:
  • #96
Vanadium 50 said:
the building with the offices of the president and provost
At least, that's a lot more political than the lab o0) Makes (a bit) more sense.
Well, a bit less non-sense...

What I can't understand is that apparently those with such unstoppable attitude are still students there.
OK, keeping them after busting the offices of top brass would be one (bit political) thing, but the case about the labs kind of expected to make a dent on the numbers and means...
 
Last edited:
  • #97
BillTre said:
Weren't most of them from the or national guard?
I believe there were also some bombs. If we cannot come up with significant numbers of deaths from exposure to dangerous scientific equipment in the 1960’s, I feel that this entire scenario is not grounded in reality.
 
  • #98
Frabjous said:
In the 60’s, the protests were much larger
Yes, but the amount of research on campus was much smaller. Some of the more dangerous aspects didn't even exist then - XeF2 wasn't used to create MEMS until around 2000, and didn't even exist anywhere on the planet until 1962.

I also remain unconvinced by the argument "we're safe - we haven't had a fatality yet". Titan sub? 737MAX? The Great Molasses Flood?
 
  • #99
Vanadium 50 said:
Yes, but the amount of research on campus was much smaller. Some of the more dangerous aspects didn't even exist then - XeF2 wasn't used to create MEMS until around 2000, and didn't even exist anywhere on the planet until 1962.

I also remain unconvinced by the argument "we're safe - we haven't had a fatality yet". Titan sub? 737MAX? The Great Molasses Flood?
There is no existential threat. People die every day because of stupidity (their own or others) or just plain bad luck. You have not demonstrated why university protestors need special protections.
 
  • Like
Likes BillTre
  • #100
berkeman said:
Photos please...
The Stanford Daily has some, but focus on the interior. KPIX and other stations have videos with a little more context.

Frabjous said:
There is no existential threat. People die every day because of stupidity (their own or others) or just plain bad luck.
OK, we'll just wait for a couple incidents. How many should we wait for?
 
  • #101
Vanadium 50 said:
OK, we'll just wait for a couple incidents. How many should we wait for?
436

One can quibble on the number, but isolated incidents are not a societal concern.
 
Last edited:
  • #102
berkeman said:
Photos please...
As the Mentors discovered, it is difficult to find pictures on the web without accompanying text with one slant or another. My position is not dependent on content - irrespective of who is right in Save the Skeets, we have:
  1. Protestors breaking into buildings (including lab buildings) and damaging things inside
  2. Hazardous materials and equipment in these buildings
  3. Security in these buildings intended to deter the casual thief and not a determined group.
My position is that fixing #1 and #3 is impractical so we need to fix #2. Or live with the consequences.
 
  • #103
Vanadium 50 said:
As the Mentors discovered, it is difficult to find pictures on the web without accompanying text with one slant or another. My position is not dependent on content - irrespective of who is right in Save the Skeets, we have:
  1. Protestors breaking into buildings (including lab buildings) and damaging things inside
  2. Hazardous materials and equipment in these buildings
  3. Security in these buildings intended to deter the casual thief and not a determined group.
My position is that fixing #1 and #3 is impractical so we need to fix #2. Or live with the consequences.
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." (H. L. Mencken).
 
  • #104
And "Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien." (Usually translated as "The perfect is the enemy of the good.")
 
  • #105
And let's not forget 1 Corinthians 11:14
'Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?'
 

Similar threads

Appl. Phys: I love everything about her.... but her Math(s)
Replies
2
Views
2K
News Interview: U.S., Russia still face mutual destruction threat
Replies
14
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top